The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1887-10-18
international Copyright.

public, OF the wrong involved In the
absence of an international copyright
law. We prefer to put our demand for
1t upon this ground ut once, because we
believe we shall never have such law
till we appeal to the common con-
science instead of the common interest.
With the common conscience IT now
distinctly rests, for, however literary
piracy grew up, in the days before the
wrong had been duly considered. il
pust now be owned that American
publishers, with but one or two excep-
pms, are in favor of its suppression.
ley stand with American authors in
Ms, and it is now the American nation
That wilfully perpetuates an abuse
: which in a small way is morally worse
than slavery in n large way. Slavery
compelled mans labor, but II gave
him in return food, SHELTER and cloth
ing, such rs they were; literary piracy
seizes the fruits of mans labor. and
gives him absolutely nothing in return
ihcit tuu NC ho VuOotioh VI tic huou'O
of the wrong, and no justification of it.
From time to time we hear that the
English also pirate American books
but no one has the cffrontery to urge
this in defence of our piracy of English
books; and every one knows that if the
English continued to pirate our books
for hundred years the balance of
guilt would still be upon our side
Moreover every one knows that If we
enacted justice to the English author.
there would be an instant response on
the part of England to our tardy re-
paration; in fact, prior publication in
Great Britain already secures for The
American author the protection which
our law denies to the alien upon any
! condition.
We confess we have not much sym
pathy with the arguments of those who
prove that foreign books would be just
rs cheap with copyright law, and that
we should somehow find our profit in
doing justice to English authors. No
doubt we should. il honesty is the best
policy; but our people have no right to
cheap literature by dcfrauding the
author; they could have cheap silks and
cheap wines by a like simple process.
We are not to give over wrong-doing
because it is wrong; and we are not to
abandon literary piracy because il has
disorganizcd the publishing business,
but because ii is II ilagranu injustice,
which no law. and no want of law. can
change in its essence.
Those who appeal to the motives of
self-nterest in urging international
copyright are like the philanthrops,s,
of no great effect in their day and gen
Grafton, who used TO say that they did
not care for the slaves, but were OPP
posed to slavery because it was so ruin
Gus to the masters. The masters smi-
ed patiently under their burdens, and
1ept on holding slaves; and probably
'lhe literary pirates. unless they are
rescued by u compassionate statute.
will continue to bear their crushing
load without murmurng. But the
voluntary pirates are no longer numer-
Gus; they are very few; and this fact
makes their offence more distinctly
national sin, because the nation could
so easily suppress them. Some of us
may seek to escape completely in the
sin by refusing to buy the cheap pirat-
ed editions of foreign books, rs certain
.ealots used to refrain from the sugar
and cotton produced by slave labor.
But this privation had no perceptible
effect upon the system of slavery,
and for one just person who denies
himself ten-cent copy of an English
novel because it pays the author moth
ing, a hundred of the wicked will buy
1t because it is ten-cent copy.
1t is the slow conscience of these
hundreds and hundred thousands that
we must reach before we can hope for
an international copyright law; and
we ought not to be discouraged be-
cause we are indefinitely remote from
the desired end. After all. the Ameri-
can nation is not so wilfully as it is
ignorantly guilty in this matter. The
great mass of the people. even of
those who buy books. have not the
least notion what a pirated book is. or
what the sacred principle which it
outrages; they do not know what copy
right is, international or otherwise.